The Further History of Some Troublesome Boys
- Author:
Horace Richards Barnes, M.A.,
Harrison Fellow in Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
This is the first attempt to follow up, after a lapse of years, the work done for a group of children by the Psychological Clinic of the University of Pennsylvania. During the summer session of 1910, a class for troublesome adolescent boys was conducted for six weeks by the Psychological Laboratory and Clinic. Dr Arthur Holmes, who organized the class under the direction of Professor Lightner Witmer, reported upon the summer’s work in an article in The Psychological Clinic, for November 15, 1910.1 With regard to the make-up of the class Dr Holmes said:
“It was found in examinations made at the Psychological Clinic preliminary to the entrance of the boys into the class, that six were moral delinquents, having stolen from their homes or other places. Of these one had been arrested and two were in the charge of probation officers of the Juvenile Court. Of the other seven, one was normal, two were backward and morally delinquent, and four were merely backward in their school work. In every case there was some reason which made the parents anxious to have their boys put under special training, the only exception being one normal boy, who accompanied his brother for the sake of companionship.” At the suggestion of Professor Witmer, the writer, while a student of psychology at the University during the winter of 1913-14, undertook to follow up these boys who had attended the special class in the summer of 1910. The work involved the writing of a number of letters, and the making of a great many visits to schools, homes, offices, factories, and other places of employment. It was impossible to see personally four of the boys who were no longer in this locality. However, some indirect information was gathered concerning the recent behavior of these four. They were D., listed as case 210; C., case 251; G., case 68, and N., case 94. The boys C. and D. came from a suburban home and D. was the only one of the two brothers who had been backward in school. C. was a normal boy eleven years of age, and naturally enough the report of Mr. Cameron, the teacher in charge, was, “His work was the best in the class.” D., twelve years of age, was brought for “moral ‘Holmes, Arthur. An Educational Experiment with Troublesome Adolescent Boys. The Psychological Cwnic, Vol, IV. No, 6, November 15, 1910, page 155. delinquency.” He had attended several public and private schools, and at the time of his first examination he was somewhat behind in his school work. Although almost thirteen years of age he was only in the fifth grade. Report of his work at the end of the summer class was that he had made the greatest mental progress of all the boys in the class, and that he had learned to control himself. The teacher in charge reported that he thought there was nothing unusual about the boy. In our efforts to follow up the life led by these brothers in the past four years we have been unable to elicit any response to our letters, from either the family or the private school which the boys are now attending. We have learned through Dr Francis N. Maxfield, Assistant Director of the Psychological Clinic, who is acquainted with one of the teachers of the boys, that they are doing well and causing no trouble. This confirms our diagnosis that there was nothing unusual about them. Their actions during the period when one of them was being brought to Clinic for examination were similar to the actions of many boys who lack firm parental control. They were typical of many children who are properly termed ” spoiled.” Upon the advice of the Clinic the boys had their adenoids removed and apparently were much improved after the operation. G., case 68, when thirteen years of age, was brought to the Clinic on account of “moral delinquency.” The summary of Mr. Cameron’s report concerning the work done by G. states that “he made decided improvement in his conduct during the term of six weeks. In the swimming pool and the gymnasium, and on the baseball field he acquitted himself well. He has good stuff in him, and I have no doubt will make a good record for himself.” In an effort to locate the family I learned from the department store where the father had formerly been employed that the family had moved to Pittsburgh about eighteen months ago.
N., case 94, was brought to the Clinic by his mother because of backwardness. He was eleven years of age and according to Mr. Cameron was far below other boys in the class in all his work. He made the greatest improvement in arithmetic and reading. He was one of the best boys in the school, and though he occasionally showed his temper, was soon set to rights by a few words of caution. A number of visits were made to schools, to the home neighborhood, and to places of business in the following up of this case. Finally I learned from a former neighbor that the family have bought a ten-acre place in New Jersey. The land is not cleared, and after learing they expect to go to truck farming. The neighbor informed me that N.’s mother was a hard working woman, and that the boy himself had been doing very well in the past two or three years, but that the father had not worked fourteen weeks during the fourteen years that she, the neighbor, had known the family. I learned also from her, that N. had been employed in a business office in Philadelphia. Upon inquiring at this office I was told that N. had been engaged as a general office boy at four dollars a week, and had done very well. He left in December, 1913, on his own initiative, stating that he was going to New Jersey.
More definite information was gathered about the remaining nine cases out of the thirteen who had attended the summer session. L., case 150, was brought to the Clinic when he was thirteen years of age because of backwardness in school, and because of bad conduct. He was found to be in poor physical condition, especially having trouble with his ears. From a number of calls made at his home and places of employment, I have learned that L. has attended school for only a few months since the summer of 1910, and was unable to accomplish anything in school. He has held several jobs, but has not stuck to any. His conduct has led to his being discharged by some of his employers. He comes from a very comfortable home, but his parents apparently do not know how to manage the boy. K., case 184, twelve years of age in 1910, was brought to the Clinic for general bad conduct,?lying, playing truant, etc. His school marks were satisfactory, but his teacher could not manage him. At the date of my visit to his home, February 25, 1914, K. was fifteen years of age, measuring six feet seven inches in height. The Clinic had previously advised that the boy be handled with patience and tact. He has good home conditions, and apparently there is no cause for alarm about this boy. He is too large to get a boy’s job and is too young and undeveloped to hold a man’s position. He has had considerable trouble with running ears. It is my belief that when he gets stronger physically he will be able to hold his own in the world.
F., case 145, was twelve years of age when brought to the Clinic because of backwardness in school. Mr. Cameron’s report was that “he had not enough of force to make great progress in anything. He is easily led.”
F. is now sixteen and is in the seventh grade, being therefore considered backward, but apparently the only thing that keeps him back is his difficulty in arithmetic. He lives in a pleasant, neat home, is a strong, intelligent looking boy, and is anxious to get to work. There are no other abnormalities in the family. The only reason that I can discover for this boy being held back in school is his failure to come up to the standard set for passing in arithmetic. I believe he will be able to get along in the world and hold his own. E., case 153, was brought to the Clinic when thirteen years of age because of backwardness and general bad conduct such, as stealing and begging. Dr Holmes said of him that he would probably land in an institution. This prognosis has been verified, for E. has since caused a great deal of trouble, and for one year, June 1911-1912, was in a protectory. On November 20, 1913, Dr Maxfield after examining E., and after thoroughly looking into his actions during the past three years, advised placing the boy in the Eastern Pennsylvania State Institution for Feebleminded and Epileptic at Spring City. Two other children in the family have also been troublesome and have been in the House of Refuge and the Rahway Reformatory. The home is a pleasant, cheerful one, but there is a family history of incorrigibility, and after taking into consideration all the facts in the case, the diagnosis of the Clinic, that the boy should be in an institution, is confirmed.
A., case 239, when thirteen years of age was brought to the Clinic because of “moral delinquency.” There are no abnormalities in the mother’s or father’s family. The mother is a coarse woman, and the father is a drunkard who seldom provides for his large family. They live in a poor home in a congested neighborhood. Upon the recommendation of the Clinic during the summer of 1910 treatment was given A. for his eyes and ears and he obtained glasses. He has since been earning a living in various mills in the city at wages varying from four to eight dollars a week.
J., case 248, when thirteen years of age was brought to the Clinic by his sister for truancy. The boy’s mother is dead and he had been causing his aunt, who was keeping house for his father, considerable trouble. Mr. Cameron’s summary of J.’s work states that he was the most unsatisfactory boy in the class, and that he was constantly causing disturbances among the other boys. His work and conduct, however, improved a great deal during the last two weeks of the session. J.’s recent historj^ shows him to be doing very well. His aunt reports that he no longer gives her trouble, and she believes a great deal of her former lack of control over the boy was due to her ignorance of the way to handle him. He attended school until June, 1913, and was in the 8A grade at this time. He left to learn the plumbing trade. During the winter he has been sticking to his job and also has been regularly attending the night school classes of the Philadelphia Trade School. As far as we are able to learn he is leading the life of a normal boy.
H., case 259, was brought to the Clinic by his mother, who had read about the special class in the newspapers and who wished to enter her son, then thirteen years of age, on account of his backwardness. Mr. Cameron reports that at “first H. was addicted to yelling out loud in school when on occasion a boy touched him. This habit left him entirely and he worked well in his studies. He was what we sometimes call a ‘touchy boy’. In the gymnasium his coordination was poor and he did not make much improvement in his general work.” In following up this boy I found that he has been working for about a year in an automobile shop for four dollars a week. On March 1, 1914, his salary was raised to five dollars a week. The foreman of the shop told me that the boy’s work was satisfactory and H. himself said that he was satisfied with his job and expected to stick to it. His general appearance is that of a normal boy, and there seems to be no reason from the family history and from H.’s recent behavior to doubt his ability to fit into society. B., case 250, was brought to the Clinic when eleven years of age by the Juvenile Aid Society because of “moral delinquency.” Mr. Cameron’s report states, “B.’s greatest difficulty was learning to speak only when called on; by the end of the term he had become pretty well the master of himself. He did good work in his studies, but was nervous in his seat,?perhaps because the chair was too uncomfortable for him. He did very well in his general work and learned to swim fairly well in the pool.” B.’s father is a tailor and seems to be doing very well. . The boy continued school until he reached the eighth grade, when he went to work in a department store. He left this place after a few days because he did not like working in the cellar. He is now doing satisfactory work in a printing shop. B. is anxious to go to a farm school, but his father informed me that the farm school will not take the boy until he is sixteen years of age. During the past two months B. has been attending a session of the public night school. M., case 256, when fifteen years of age was brought to the Clinic on account of backwardness. He comes from a very good home, and his family are much interested in the case. Conversation with the boy and general observation lead me to suspect that he is of a lower type mentally than any of the other boys in his class whom I have seen. Mr. Cameron’s report, however, states that he studied well and made good progress; his conduct was good and he was always willing to do anything asked. His school records during the time he attended school since leaving here showed that when he left in June, 1912, he was in the 4A grade, although he was then seventeen years of age. He has been working for almost a year with a manufacturing company in the city. A talk with the foreman of M.’s division revealed the fact that the boy was getting along verywell and though a little slow seemed to understand what was expected of him. He has been receiving six dollars a week wages. A study of these thirteen cases raises a number of questions.
Nearly all of these boys were brought to the Psychological Clinic for mental diagnosis, because of their incorrigibility. In other words, their actions especially marked them, and these actions, which may have been chronic or spasmodic, did not conform to the standard set as normal by society. Are such tendencies as were displayed by these boys,?and they represent a very small proportion of a large group which is offering a big and important problem,?atavistic? Have we all inherited similar tendencies, which we have learned to suppress because of the influence of environment upon us, or are such tendencies given only to a porti’on of the race? It is my belief that we all have these tendencies working in us, but owing to the influence of training and environment they have become regulated to our social life. Because of the advantage of years and changes of custom, because of suppression, because of lack of use, these criminalistic tendencies no longer play the role in the daily life of man that they did in the early ages when man for his self-preservation had to secure his livelihood regardless of the consequence to his fellowman. An examination of these thirteen cases leaves no doubt that the influences of the three great forces of life,?heredity, environment and training, have some part to play in each case. There seems to be evidence to warrant our laying emphasis on the lack of wholesome environment and on the lack of careful training in the majority of these cases. Few of the family histories show abnormalities, and if these are accurate statements, we would infer that it was because of lack of parental control,?either because the parents were both out working during the day, or because parents did not understand their children,?that the boys acted as they did, and led society to suspect that they were likely to become dangerous citizens.
In many of the cases as a result of the examination at the Pyschological Clinic the boys were taken to various medical dispensaries, and physical benefits were derived by following out recommendations involving the removal of adenoids, ear treatment, securing of eye glasses, etc., etc. These procedures brought about an improvement in the general condition of the boy and also in his mental work. This leads to the conclusion that the physical condition of the boy plays an important role in his conduct. Another factor that must be taken into consideration was the attitude of the boy toward his public school, and of the public school toward the boy. Every case improved during the six weeks of the special class and at the end of three and a half years the parents of these boys are unanimous in their decision that their sons were helped by the Summer School. This leads me to conclude that in several cases if not in all, the public schools missed an opportunity to aid in solving the problem.
The recent interest in child welfare, which is leading to a reorganization of our school system, to measures to improve and keep intact the home, and in other ways to give every child a fair chance for normal development, will no doubt aid us greatly in solving the problem of the boy who because of his behavior is called “incorrigible”. In conclusion, I wish to emphasize the value of a diagnosis in every case. The present methods of keeping our clinical records include giving a diagnosis along with the other important information about the case. This was not done in some of our older records, and nearly all of these cases lack a definite diagnosis as to mental condition. It is always wise to make the diagnosis, even although it be a tentative one, so that we can use it for comparison when we take into consideration the future progress of the individual.
Disclaimer
The historical material in this project falls into one of three categories for clearances and permissions:
Material currently under copyright, made available with a Creative Commons license chosen by the publisher.
Material that is in the public domain
Material identified by the Welcome Trust as an Orphan Work, made available with a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
While we are in the process of adding metadata to the articles, please check the article at its original source for specific copyrights.